Migrating Processes from Physical to Virtual Environments: Process Virtualization Theory

Chapter
Part of the Integrated Series in Information Systems book series (ISIS, volume 28)

Abstract

Increasingly, processes that have relied on physical interaction between people, and between people and objects are being migrated to virtual environments in which physical interaction is not available. For example, medical processes that have traditionally relied on physical interaction between physician and patient are conducted virtually through telemedicine, and shopping processes that have traditionally relied on physical interaction between shoppers and products are conducted virtually via electronic commerce. I refer to this migration as process virtualization. Although the pace of process virtualization is accelerating, some processes have proven more suitable for virtualization than others. Process virtualization theory is a recently proposed theory designed to explain this variance. This chapter describes the theory by defining terms, discussing the constructs and relationships of the theory that explain and predict how suitable a process is to being conducted virtually, and discussing how the theory fits into the Information Systems discipline.

Keywords

Process Virtual Virtualization Information systems Theory 

Abbreviations

IS

Information Systems

IT

Information Technology

TAM

Technology Acceptance Model

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Research commentary: Technology-mediated learning – A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems Research, 12(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alavi, M., Wheeler, B. C., & Valacich, J. S. (1995). Using IT to reengineer business education: An exploratory investigation of collaborative telelearning. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19(3), 293–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Apte, U. M., & Mason, R. O. (1995). Global disaggregation of information-intensive services. Management Science, 41(7), 1250–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ba, S., & Pavlou, P. (2002). Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in electronic ­markets: Price premiums and buyer behavior. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26(3), 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bakos, J. Y. (1997). Reducing buyer search costs: Implications for electronic marketplaces. Management Science, 43(12), 1676–1692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. W. (2003). The identity crisis within the IS discipline: Defining and ­communicating the discipline’s core properties. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(2), 183–194.Google Scholar
  9. Broadbent, M., Weill, P., Clair, D. S., & Kearney, A. T. (1999). The implications of information technology infrastructure for business process redesign. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 23(2), 159–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Y. J., & Smith, M. D. (2003). Consumer surplus in the digital economy: Estimating the value of increased product variety at online booksellers. Management Science, 49(11), 1580–1596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brynjolfsson, E., & Smith, M. D. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of Internet and conventional retailers. Management Science, 46(4), 563–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, J., Ping, W., Xu, Y., & Tan, B. C. Y. (2009). Am I afraid of my peers? Understanding the antecedents of information privacy concerns in the online social context. Paper presented at the international conference on information systems, Phoenix, AZ.Google Scholar
  13. Davenport, T. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  14. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, A., Murphy, J., Owens, D., Khazanchi, D., & Zigurs, I. (2009). Avatars, people, and virtual worlds: Foundations for research in metaverses. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(2), 90–117.Google Scholar
  16. Dellarocas, C. (2005). Reputation mechanism design in online trading environments with pure moral hazard. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 209–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dombrowski, S. C., LeMasney, J. W., Ahia, C. E., & Dickson, S. A. (2004). Protecting children from online sexual predators: Technological, psychoeducational, and legal considerations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35(1), 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.Google Scholar
  20. Evans, P. B., & Wurster, T. S. (2000). Blown to bits: How the new economics of information transforms strategy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  21. Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2005). Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: Untangling the contradictions. Organization Science, 16(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fitzgerald, B. (2006). The transformation of open source software. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30(3), 587–598.Google Scholar
  23. Giddens, A. (1986). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  24. Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hitsch, G. J., Hortacsu, A., & Ariely, D. (2010). Matching and sorting in online dating. The American Economic Review, 100(1), 130–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holmberg, B. (2005). The evolution, principles and practices of distance education. Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.Google Scholar
  27. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Shaw, T. R., & Staples, D. S. (2004). Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information Systems Research, 15(3), 250–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2007). The effects of presentation formats and task complexity on online consumers’ product understanding. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(3), 475–500.Google Scholar
  30. Kambil, A., & van Heck, E. (1998). Reengineering the Dutch flower auctions: A framework for analyzing exchange organizations. Information Systems Research, 9(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koppius, O., van Heck, E., & Wolters, M. (2004). The importance of product representation online: Empirical results and implications for electronic markets. Decision Support Systems, 38(2), 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leidner, D. L., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1993). The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms. Information Systems Research, 4(1), 24–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Majchrzak, A., Rice, R. E., Malhotra, A., King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 24(4), 569–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Malone, T. W., Yates, J., & Benjamin, R. I. (1987). Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 484–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Markus, M. L., & Saunders, C. (2007). Looking for a few good concepts…and theories…for the information systems field. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(1), iii–vi.Google Scholar
  36. McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mesch, G., & Talmud, I. (2006). The quality of online and offline relationships: The role of multiplexity and duration of social relationships. Information Society, 22(3), 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mithas, S., & Whitaker, J. (2007). Is the world flat or spiky? Information intensity, skills, and global service disaggregation. Information Systems Research, 18(3), 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D., & George, J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34(7), 40–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology – Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” In IT research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Overby, E. (2008). Process virtualization theory and the impact of information technology. Organization Science, 19(2), 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Parks, M. R., & Roberts, L. D. (1998). Making moosic: The development of personal relationships online and a comparison to their offline counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(4), 517–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2006). The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation. Information Systems Research, 17(4), 392–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 25(4), 401–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ramus, K., & Nielsen, N. A. (2005). Online grocery retailing: What do consumers think? Internet Research, 15(3), 335–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Staples, D. S., Hulland, J. S., & Higgins, C. A. (1999). A self-efficacy theory explanation for the management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6), 758–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. The Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Suh, K.-S., & Lee, Y. E. (2005). The effects of virtual reality on consumer learning: An empirical investigation. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 29(4), 673–697.Google Scholar
  50. Weber, R. (2003). Editor’s comments: Still desperately seeking the IT artifact. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(2), iii–xi.Google Scholar
  51. Wigand, R., & Benjamin, R. I. (1995). Electronic commerce: Effects on electronic markets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1(3), 1–11.Google Scholar
  52. Yoo, Y., & Alavi, M. (2001). Media and group cohesion: Relative influences on social presence, task participation, and group consensus. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 25(3), 371–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of ManagementGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations